Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26392282›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2015

Between government policy, clinical autonomy, and market demands: a qualitative study of the impact of the Prescribing Analysis System on behavior of physicians in South Korea.

Dong-Sook Kim, Green Bae, Soo Yeon Yoo, Minah Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Dong-Sook KimReview and Assessment Research Institute, Health Insurance Review and Assessment Services, 267 (Seocho-dong) Hyoyeong-ro, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 137-706, South Korea. sttone@hiramail.net.
Green BaeBioethics Policy Studies, Ewha Womans University, 314 Posco, 52 Ewhayeodae-gil, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul, 120-750, South Korea. greeni77@gmail.com.
Soo Yeon YooReview and Assessment Research Institute, Health Insurance Review and Assessment Services, 267 (Seocho-dong) Hyoyeong-ro, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 137-706, South Korea. yousooyeon@hiramail.net.
Minah KangDepartment of Public Administration, College of Social Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, 120-750, South Korea. minahkang@ewha.ac.kr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn South Korea, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service manages the Prescribing Analysis System (PAS) to evaluate the appropriate use of medication. To achieve the system's goal of changing prescribing behavior, it is critical to understand how physicians respond to the PAS. This study analyzes the opinions of South Korean physicians about the PAS, the way it is used, and factors affecting prescribing behavior.

methodsA qualitative, exploratory approach was used, with four focus groups of physicians from different specialties. A semi-structured guide was used to explore their opinions. Transcripts of the discussions were analyzed by the authors, who independently considered content using uniform categories. Common themes were extracted and used to gather results and draw conclusions.

resultsPhysicians acknowledged some positive aspects of the PAS but, overall, had mainly negative impressions of the system, and particularly, the evaluation reports that it generates. They reported that their prescribing behavior was affected by predisposing factors, including experiential, environmental and psychological factors. Physicians reported that their negative perceptions regarding the regulations were primarily influenced by concerns about maintaining their autonomy and expertise. However, their strong resistance to these perceived infringements on their independence may be considered inconsistent in relation to their professional autonomy as there was an equally strong concern about market competition. Physicians' objections to the PAS are more likely to have been caused by deeply rooted distrust of the government agency in charge of the system. DISCUSSION: Interestingly, we found that physicians' strong resistance to perceived violations of their autonomy seems somewhat inconsistent and contradictory. While they are very positive about new information or printed materials provided by pharmaceutical representatives, they are less enthusiastic when it comes to governmental guidelines or standards. Similarly, they appear to willingly accept situations in which they believe they should comply with patients' demands as a means of surviving in a competitive market. It is notable that physicians' negative perceptions of PAS seemed to be aggravated by suspicion and distrust regarding the purpose of this program.

conclusionsBecause of widespread beliefs in professional autonomy, market competition, and a deep-seated distrust of the system, it would be difficult for the government to persuade physicians to change their prescribing behaviors using only the PAS. Successful implementation of the PAS will not only require its improvement as a policy tool, but also the creation of a social consensus regarding the PAS.

Indexed as

Drug PrescriptionsGovernment RegulationHealth Services Needs and DemandPractice Patterns, Physicians'Professional AutonomyAdultFemaleFocus GroupsHumansInsurance, HealthMaleMiddle AgedPerceptionPhysiciansQualitative ResearchRepublic of Korea

Identifiers

PMID26392282
PMCPMC4578427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.